# BART Exemption Modeling Report:

Georgia Power Company Plant McIntosh

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation for Georgia Power Company

September 2006September 2006 

### i 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introduction...................................

................................................... ................................................... ...... 1-1

1.1 Objectives .........................................

................................................... ............................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas ......

................................................... ....................... 1-1

1.3 Organization of protocol document..................

................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.0 Source description and emissions data ..........

................................................... .................................. 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data..........................

................................................... .................................... 2-1

3.0 Modeling results...............................

................................................... ................................................... .. 3-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Day s – For Each Year/Each Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years......

................................................... ............A-1September 2006 

### ii 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant McIntosh modeling emission parameters ........

................................................... ........... 2-3

Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant McIntosh Ref ined BART Exemption Modeling ................ 3-1



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant McIntosh........................................... ....... 1-2September 2006 1-1 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retr ofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that ‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be a nticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Pursuant to federal regulations, states have the o ption of exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requ irements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating that the source cannot reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Ag ency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states s ubject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determin e that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

### and NO x 

### for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback fr om the Georgia Environmental Protection Division indicates that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

### and NO x 

### for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling report focuses on performing the BART modeling analysis for particula te matter (PM) only.

Unit 1 at Plant McIntosh, located near Albany, whic h is owned and operated by Georgia Power Company ∗ 

### , has been identified as a BART-eligible source. The mod eling procedures outlined in the source-specific BA RT modeling protocol for Plant McIntosh were used to d etermine whether the source is subject to BART requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling pr ocedures are consistent with those outlined in the updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3 – July 18, 2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.org/BART/BARTModelingProto col_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf . This source-specific BART modeling protocol references r elevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling protocol.



## 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division, whic h is in charge of the state’s BART program, has determined that Unit 1 at Plant McIntosh is BART-el igible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant Mc Intosh relative to nearby Class I Areas. There are three Class I areas within 300 km of the plant: Cape Roma in (152.6 km), Okefenokee (177.1 km), and Wolf Island (110.5 km). The BART exemption modeling was conducted for these Class I areas in accordance wit h the referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source -specific BART modeling protocol.

∗ 

### The merger of Georgia Power and Savannah Electric has been completed. Therefore, this unit is now ow ned and operated by Georgia Power Company.September 2006 1-2 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

### Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant McIntoshSeptember 2006 2-1 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the visibility im pacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant M cIntosh are discussed in this section. The Georgia Environ mental Protection Division has indicated that CAIR will satisfy BART for EGUs for SO 2 

### and NO x 

### . Therefore, this BART exemption modeling analysis focuses only on PM 10 

### . Since various components of PM 10 

### emissions have different visibility extinction eff iciencies, the PM 10 

### emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5) allows for the use of source-specific emissions and speciatio n factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

### emissions and speciation approach that were used f or the modeling is indicated below. Where default speciat ion values are used, the data represents a unit whe re current (baseline) emission controls include electr ostatic precipitators (ESPs), but no post-combustio n NO x 

### or SO 2 

### control equipment exists.

• Total PM 10 

### is comprised of filterable and condensable emissio ns.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

### emissions are based on the highest stack test for t he most recent 3-year period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined wi th the highest 24 hour heat input value for this period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24 hour average emission rate” as required by the VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

### has been subdivided by size category consistent wi th the default approach from AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission contro ls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

### emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in si ze) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% i s elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fin e particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

### consists of inorganic and organic compounds. The inorganic portion is by default assumed to be H 2 

### SO 4 

### , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols.

• Baseline H 2 

### SO 4 

### emissions are calculated consistent with the metho d used by Georgia Power to derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach as sumes that the H 2 

### SO 4 

### emissions released from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

### emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type and the removal of H 2 

### SO 4 

### by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater) . For eastern bituminous coal the baseline H 2 

### SO 4 

### release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.8% of the SO 2 

### emissions. Appendix A of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific values used.

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the rem aining portion of condensable PM 10 

### ) are derived based on the supporting field observational informa tion in Appendix B of the site-specific modeling protocol and is estimated as 0.32% of SO 2 

### emitted.

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 mic rons in size) will be modeled with a geometric mass mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filterable a nd all condensable particles will be modeled with a geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, consi stent with the CALPUFF default value for fine particles. The geometric standard deviation for bo th fine and coarse particles will be set to 2 micro ns, consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes from the default values in sample input files prese nted on the TRC web site. There is no default value presented for the coarse particles on the TRC web site. However, since 5 is the geometric mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coa rse particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.

In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input c ertain components of PM 10 

### as separate species and separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also mo reSeptember 2006 2-2 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

### accurate effects on light scattering. As noted abo ve, the particle size distribution information is p rovided in AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and will be used for the BART ex emption modeling.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emissi on parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling, consistent with the source emissions data presented in Appendices A and B of the site-specific modelin g protocol for the baseline. All of the emissions in Table 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005 period and represent the maximum 24-hour average lb /hr rates (excluding days where startup, shutdown, or malfunctions occurred). For NO x 

### and SO 2 

### the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM 10 

### emissions were calculated using the highest stack test over the 20 03 to 2005 period and multiplying these values time s the maximum 24-hour average heat input derived from CEM S. These values were then adjusted using AP-42 factors from Table 1.1-6 that indicate that PM 10 

### is 67% of total PM for a pulverized coal unit with an ESP. PM 10 

### speciation was then performed as indicated above su ch that total Filterable PM 10 

### is made up of Coarse Soil plus total Fine PM and total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC).September 20062-3091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 Plant McIntosh modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 17 NAD-83)Emissions1Particle Speciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hrlbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 1 484,162 3,579,890 121.9 9.75 3.5 24.2 425.8 3904.00 1323.33 44.49 20.51 11.41 9.11 8.77 0.34 23.98 11.48 12.49Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3Baselinem m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hrlbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 Unit 1 484,162 3,579,890 105.16 9.75 3.5 24.2 425.8 3904.00 1323.33 44.49 20.51 11.41 9.11 8.77 0.34 23.98 11.48 12.49Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/secg/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 1 Unit 1 484,162 3,579,890 105.16 9.75 3.5 24.2 425.8 491.90 166.74 5.61 2.58 1.44 1.15 1.11 0.04 3.02 1.45 1.571SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sourcesin CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of the BART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference in the computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack credit is equal to GEP. GEP of 345 ft (105.2 m) is less than actual height therefore GEP height is used for modeling.September 2006 3-1 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.0 Modeling results

The exemption modeling results are provided in Tabl e 3-1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 da ys for the overall three years at each Class I area . The table indicates that both the 8 th 

### highest day’s impacts for each year and the 22 nd 

### highest day’s impacts over all three years are below 0.5 delta-dv. These results demonstrate that Plant McIntosh’s PM 10 

### emissions do not cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Ther efore, the source is not subject to BART for PM 10 

### , and no further BART analysis is required.

Electronic data related to this application are pro vided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and list (LST) files.September 2006 3-1 091506 McIntosh BART Modeling Report.doc 

### Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant McIntosh Refin ed BART Exemption Modeling

2001 2002 2003

Class I area Distance

from source

to Class I

area boundary # of days and

receptors beyond 98 th

percentile with impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th

Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors beyond 98 th

percentile with impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th

Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors beyond 98 th

percentile with impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th

Highest

delta-dv Highest of

8 th Highest

delta-dv

for the 3-

years 22 nd

Highest

delta-dv

over 3-

year period

Km Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec de lta-dv delta-dv delta-dv

Cape Romain 152.6 0 0 0.04 0 0 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.04 0.04

Okefenokee 177.1 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.03 0.03

Wolf Island 110.5 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.03 0.03

# Appendix A

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Eac h Year/Each Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Y ears

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Cape Romain (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 16 0 1 7.582 7.519 0.064 3.3 69.77 0 22.67 1.4 4 2.11 4.01 1 2001 313 0 48 7.573 7.519 0.054 3.4 70.25 0 22.15 1 .41 2.27 3.92 2 2001 175 0 7 7.573 7.519 0.054 3.7 72.18 0 20.92 1. 33 1.87 3.7 3 2001 240 0 32 7.569 7.519 0.05 4.1 74.1 0 19.38 1.2 3 1.86 3.42 4 2001 242 0 25 7.559 7.519 0.04 4.1 74.36 0 19.45 1. 24 1.51 3.44 5 2001 220 0 2 7.558 7.519 0.04 4.1 74.24 0 19.41 1.2 4 1.67 3.43 6 2001 8 0 65 7.556 7.519 0.038 3.3 70.35 0 22.85 1.4 6 1.29 4.04 7 2001 298 0 1 7.556 7.519 0.037 3.7 71.9 0 20.83 1.3 3 2.25 3.68 8 2001 48 0 62 7.555 7.519 0.036 3 67.34 0 24.07 1.53 2.81 4.25 9 2001 241 0 3 7.554 7.519 0.035 4.1 74.4 0 19.45 1.2 4 1.46 3.44 10 2001 224 0 32 7.552 7.519 0.033 4.1 74.02 0 19.36 1 .23 1.97 3.42 11 2001 201 0 1 7.552 7.519 0.033 3.6 71.58 0 21.32 1. 36 1.97 3.77 12 2001 32 0 2 7.552 7.519 0.033 3.3 69.71 0 22.65 1.4 4 2.19 4 13 2001 222 0 48 7.548 7.519 0.029 4.1 74.36 0 19.45 1 .24 1.51 3.44 14 2001 221 0 1 7.547 7.519 0.028 4.1 74.28 0 19.42 1. 24 1.62 3.43 15 2001 188 0 48 7.546 7.519 0.028 3.6 71.6 0 21.32 1. 36 1.94 3.77 16 2001 277 0 48 7.546 7.519 0.027 3.7 71.98 0 20.86 1 .33 2.14 3.69 17 2001 158 0 32 7.546 7.519 0.027 3.7 72.14 0 20.9 1. 33 1.92 3.69 18 2001 245 0 2 7.544 7.519 0.025 4 73.85 0 19.79 1.26 1.59 3.5 19 2001 223 0 65 7.544 7.519 0.025 4.1 74.27 0 19.42 1 .24 1.63 3.43 20

2002 198 0 2 7.568 7.519 0.049 3.6 71.66 0 21.34 1. 36 1.86 3.77 1 2002 232 0 1 7.566 7.519 0.047 4.1 74.06 0 19.37 1. 23 1.92 3.42 2 2002 187 0 48 7.565 7.519 0.046 3.6 71.61 0 21.33 1 .36 1.92 3.77 3 2002 153 0 1 7.56 7.519 0.041 3.7 72.5 0 21.01 1.34 1.43 3.71 4 2002 6 0 39 7.559 7.519 0.04 3.3 69.45 0 22.56 1.44 2.55 3.99 5 2002 18 0 1 7.558 7.519 0.039 3.3 69.9 0 22.71 1.45 1.93 4.01 6 2002 146 0 32 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.2 69.4 0 23.25 1. 48 1.75 4.11 7 2002 236 0 32 7.554 7.519 0.035 4.1 74.27 0 19.42 1 .24 1.63 3.43 8 2002 233 0 127 7.554 7.519 0.035 4.1 74.06 0 19.37 1.23 1.9 3.42 9 2002 30 0 10 7.553 7.519 0.034 3.3 69.65 0 22.63 1. 44 2.27 4 10 2002 202 0 144 7.552 7.519 0.033 3.6 71.7 0 21.35 1 .36 1.81 3.77 11 2002 12 0 2 7.552 7.519 0.033 3.3 69.67 0 22.63 1.4 4 2.25 4 12 2002 330 0 163 7.551 7.519 0.032 3.4 70.65 0 22.28 1.42 1.7 3.94 13 2002 196 0 78 7.55 7.519 0.031 3.6 71.93 0 21.42 1. 36 1.5 3.79 14 2002 231 0 1 7.549 7.519 0.03 4.1 74.36 0 19.44 1.2 4 1.52 3.44 15 2002 77 0 2 7.548 7.519 0.03 2.9 67.21 0 24.85 1.58 1.95 4.39 16 2002 357 0 2 7.546 7.519 0.028 3.2 68.91 0 23.09 1. 47 2.44 4.08 17 2002 272 0 1 7.546 7.519 0.027 4 73.58 0 19.72 1.26 1.94 3.49 18 2002 260 0 1 7.546 7.519 0.027 4 73.82 0 19.79 1.26 1.62 3.5 19 2002 19 0 1 7.545 7.519 0.026 3.3 69.28 0 22.51 1.4 3 2.8 3.98 20

2003 263 0 2 7.57 7.519 0.051 4 73.67 0 19.75 1.26 1.84 3.49 1 2003 202 0 7 7.568 7.519 0.049 3.6 71.28 0 21.23 1. 35 2.39 3.75 2 2003 317 0 20 7.561 7.519 0.042 3.4 70.48 0 22.23 1 .42 1.94 3.93 3 2003 295 0 7 7.56 7.519 0.041 3.7 72.22 0 20.93 1.3 3 1.82 3.7 4 2003 231 0 2 7.558 7.519 0.039 4.1 73.96 0 19.34 1. 23 2.04 3.42 5 2003 172 0 65 7.557 7.519 0.038 3.7 72.44 0 20.99 1 .34 1.52 3.71 6 2003 22 0 2 7.557 7.519 0.038 3.3 70.02 0 22.75 1.4 5 1.76 4.02 7 2003 218 0 2 7.556 7.519 0.037 4.1 73.89 0 19.32 1. 23 2.13 3.42 8 2003 198 0 32 7.556 7.519 0.037 3.6 71.9 0 21.41 1. 36 1.54 3.78 9 2003 191 0 20 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.6 71.29 0 21.23 1 .35 2.37 3.75 10 2003 130 0 2 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.2 68.78 0 23.04 1. 47 2.64 4.07 11 2003 21 0 2 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.3 69.93 0 22.72 1.4 5 1.88 4.02 12 2003 3 0 32 7.552 7.519 0.033 3.3 70.19 0 22.8 1.45 1.51 4.03 13 2003 182 0 32 7.551 7.519 0.032 3.7 71.96 0 20.85 1 .33 2.17 3.69 14 2003 147 0 2 7.55 7.519 0.032 3.2 69.02 0 23.12 1.4 7 2.29 4.09 15 2003 131 0 2 7.551 7.519 0.032 3.2 69.3 0 23.22 1.4 8 1.89 4.1 16 2003 236 0 65 7.549 7.519 0.031 4.1 74.36 0 19.45 1 .24 1.51 3.44 17 2003 219 0 2 7.55 7.519 0.031 4.1 74.02 0 19.36 1.2 3 1.97 3.42 18 2003 35 0 37 7.55 7.519 0.031 3 67.77 0 24.22 1.54 2.18 4.28 19 2003 212 0 163 7.549 7.519 0.03 3.6 71.49 0 21.29 1 .36 2.09 3.76 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Cape Romain (Top 25 Days Over Three Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 16 1 7.582 7.519 0.064 3.3 69.77 0.00 22.67 1. 44 2.11 4.01 1 2001 313 48 7.573 7.519 0.054 3.4 70.25 0.00 22.15 1.41 2.27 3.92 2 2001 175 7 7.573 7.519 0.054 3.7 72.18 0.00 20.92 1 .33 1.87 3.70 3 2003 263 2 7.570 7.519 0.051 4.0 73.67 0.00 19.75 1 .26 1.84 3.49 4 2001 240 32 7.569 7.519 0.050 4.1 74.10 0.00 19.38 1.23 1.86 3.42 5 2002 198 2 7.568 7.519 0.049 3.6 71.66 0.00 21.34 1 .36 1.86 3.77 6 2003 202 7 7.568 7.519 0.049 3.6 71.28 0.00 21.23 1 .35 2.39 3.75 7 2002 232 1 7.566 7.519 0.047 4.1 74.06 0.00 19.37 1 .23 1.92 3.42 8 2002 187 48 7.565 7.519 0.046 3.6 71.61 0.00 21.33 1.36 1.92 3.77 9 2003 317 20 7.561 7.519 0.042 3.4 70.48 0.00 22.23 1.42 1.94 3.93 10 2002 153 1 7.560 7.519 0.041 3.7 72.50 0.00 21.01 1 .34 1.43 3.71 11 2003 295 7 7.560 7.519 0.041 3.7 72.22 0.00 20.93 1 .33 1.82 3.70 12 2001 242 25 7.559 7.519 0.040 4.1 74.36 0.00 19.45 1.24 1.51 3.44 13 2001 220 2 7.558 7.519 0.040 4.1 74.24 0.00 19.41 1 .24 1.67 3.43 14 2002 6 39 7.559 7.519 0.040 3.3 69.45 0.00 22.56 1. 44 2.55 3.99 15 2002 18 1 7.558 7.519 0.039 3.3 69.90 0.00 22.71 1. 45 1.93 4.01 16 2003 231 2 7.558 7.519 0.039 4.1 73.96 0.00 19.34 1 .23 2.04 3.42 17 2001 8 65 7.556 7.519 0.038 3.3 70.35 0.00 22.85 1. 46 1.29 4.04 18 2003 172 65 7.557 7.519 0.038 3.7 72.44 0.00 20.99 1.34 1.52 3.71 19 2003 22 2 7.557 7.519 0.038 3.3 70.02 0.00 22.75 1. 45 1.76 4.02 20 2001 298 1 7.556 7.519 0.037 3.7 71.90 0.00 20.83 1 .33 2.25 3.68 21 2003 218 2 7.556 7.519 0.037 4.1 73.89 0.00 19.32 1 .23 2.13 3.42 22 2003 198 32 7.556 7.519 0.037 3.6 71.90 0.00 21.41 1.36 1.54 3.78 23 2001 48 62 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.0 67.34 0.00 24.07 1 .53 2.81 4.25 24 2002 146 32 7.555 7.519 0.036 3.2 69.40 0.00 23.25 1.48 1.75 4.11 25

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 271 0 662 7.663 7.608 0.055 4 74.21 0 19.89 1. 27 1.12 3.52 1 2001 302 0 249 7.644 7.608 0.036 3.8 73.63 0 20.77 1.32 0.61 3.67 2 2001 281 0 613 7.64 7.608 0.032 3.8 73.63 0 20.77 1 .32 0.59 3.67 3 2001 272 0 353 7.64 7.608 0.032 4 74.1 0 19.86 1.27 1.26 3.51 4 2001 23 0 557 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.5 71.93 0 22.03 1 .4 0.74 3.89 5 2001 310 0 664 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.5 71.71 0 21.97 1.4 1.04 3.88 6 2001 295 0 658 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.8 73.16 0 20.64 1.31 1.22 3.65 7 2001 274 0 641 7.632 7.608 0.024 4 74.57 0 19.99 1. 27 0.64 3.53 8 2001 294 0 534 7.631 7.608 0.023 3.8 73.32 0 20.69 1.32 1.01 3.66 9 2001 170 0 658 7.631 7.608 0.023 3.7 72.16 0 20.91 1.33 1.9 3.7 10 2001 303 0 658 7.63 7.608 0.022 3.8 73.62 0 20.77 1 .32 0.61 3.67 11 2001 259 0 641 7.63 7.608 0.022 4 74.8 0 20.05 1.28 0.32 3.54 12 2001 50 0 658 7.63 7.608 0.022 3.2 70.01 0 23.46 1. 49 0.89 4.15 13 2001 59 0 664 7.629 7.608 0.021 3.2 69.11 0 23.15 1 .47 2.16 4.09 14 2001 45 0 353 7.63 7.608 0.021 3.2 70.08 0 23.48 1. 5 0.78 4.15 15 2001 18 0 249 7.628 7.608 0.02 3.5 71.44 0 21.88 1. 39 1.4 3.87 16 2001 320 0 658 7.627 7.608 0.018 3.5 71.9 0 22.03 1 .4 0.77 3.89 17 2001 117 0 534 7.626 7.608 0.018 3 68.38 0 24.44 1. 56 1.3 4.32 18 2001 321 0 197 7.625 7.608 0.017 3.5 71.64 0 21.94 1.4 1.13 3.88 19 2001 14 0 286 7.625 7.608 0.017 3.5 71.97 0 22.05 1 .4 0.68 3.9 20

2002 343 0 663 7.653 7.608 0.045 3.6 72.3 0 21.53 1 .37 0.99 3.81 1 2002 342 0 664 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.6 71.6 0 21.32 1 .36 1.95 3.77 2 2002 141 0 663 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.6 71.89 0 21.41 1.36 1.55 3.78 3 2002 246 0 557 7.641 7.608 0.033 4 74.46 0 19.96 1. 27 0.77 3.53 4 2002 337 0 197 7.64 7.608 0.032 3.6 72.1 0 21.47 1. 37 1.25 3.8 5 2002 325 0 658 7.64 7.608 0.032 3.5 71.25 0 21.83 1 .39 1.67 3.86 6 2002 333 0 657 7.638 7.608 0.03 3.5 71.16 0 21.8 1. 39 1.8 3.85 7 2002 56 0 197 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.2 69.6 0 23.32 1. 49 1.47 4.12 8 2002 140 0 651 7.635 7.608 0.027 3.6 72.25 0 21.52 1.37 1.05 3.8 9 2002 344 0 658 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.6 71.92 0 21.42 1.36 1.51 3.79 10 2002 296 0 663 7.632 7.608 0.024 3.8 73.18 0 20.65 1.32 1.2 3.65 11 2002 331 0 628 7.63 7.608 0.022 3.5 71.58 0 21.93 1 .4 1.22 3.88 12 2002 55 0 628 7.63 7.608 0.022 3.2 69.67 0 23.34 1. 49 1.36 4.13 13 2002 306 0 628 7.63 7.608 0.021 3.5 71.81 0 22 1.4 0.89 3.89 14 2002 324 0 664 7.627 7.608 0.019 3.5 71.63 0 21.94 1.4 1.14 3.88 15 2002 28 0 664 7.627 7.608 0.019 3.5 71.84 0 22.01 1 .4 0.86 3.89 16 2002 126 0 353 7.624 7.608 0.016 3.6 72.39 0 21.56 1.37 0.85 3.81 17 2002 37 0 628 7.625 7.608 0.016 3.2 70.04 0 23.46 1 .49 0.86 4.15 18 2002 319 0 386 7.622 7.608 0.014 3.5 70.86 0 21.71 1.38 2.21 3.84 19 2002 309 0 353 7.622 7.608 0.014 3.5 71.8 0 21.99 1 .4 0.91 3.89 20

2003 256 0 658 7.665 7.608 0.057 4 73.8 0 19.78 1.2 6 1.66 3.5 1 2003 276 0 628 7.657 7.608 0.049 3.8 73.1 0 20.62 1 .31 1.31 3.65 2 2003 255 0 663 7.648 7.608 0.04 4 74.12 0 19.87 1.2 7 1.23 3.51 3 2003 361 0 556 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.6 71.92 0 21.42 1.36 1.51 3.79 4 2003 32 0 664 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.5 71.74 0 21.98 1 .4 0.99 3.88 5 2003 314 0 628 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.5 72.14 0 22.1 1 .41 0.44 3.91 6 2003 254 0 663 7.641 7.608 0.033 4 74.12 0 19.87 1. 27 1.23 3.51 7 2003 293 0 651 7.64 7.608 0.032 3.8 72.98 0 20.59 1 .31 1.48 3.64 8 2003 273 0 534 7.638 7.608 0.03 4 74.57 0 19.99 1.2 7 0.63 3.53 9 2003 259 0 664 7.638 7.608 0.03 4 74.51 0 19.97 1.2 7 0.71 3.53 10 2003 14 0 596 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.5 71.39 0 21.87 1 .39 1.48 3.87 11 2003 257 0 663 7.632 7.608 0.024 4 74.2 0 19.89 1.2 7 1.13 3.52 12 2003 253 0 197 7.632 7.608 0.024 4 74.17 0 19.88 1. 27 1.17 3.51 13 2003 319 0 663 7.631 7.608 0.023 3.5 71.42 0 21.88 1.39 1.44 3.87 14 2003 362 0 663 7.63 7.608 0.022 3.6 72.29 0 21.53 1 .37 0.99 3.81 15 2003 307 0 557 7.626 7.608 0.018 3.5 70.54 0 21.61 1.38 2.65 3.82 16 2003 275 0 628 7.626 7.608 0.018 3.8 73.36 0 20.7 1 .32 0.96 3.66 17 2003 261 0 658 7.626 7.608 0.018 4 74.43 0 19.95 1. 27 0.82 3.53 18 2003 326 0 166 7.623 7.608 0.015 3.5 71.41 0 21.87 1.39 1.44 3.87 19 2003 274 0 463 7.623 7.608 0.015 4 73.98 0 19.83 1. 26 1.42 3.5 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 25 Days Over Three Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2003 256 658 7.665 7.608 0.057 4.0 73.80 0.00 19.78 1.26 1.66 3.50 1 2001 271 662 7.663 7.608 0.055 4.0 74.21 0.00 19.89 1.27 1.12 3.52 2 2003 276 628 7.657 7.608 0.049 3.8 73.10 0.00 20.62 1.31 1.31 3.65 3 2002 343 663 7.653 7.608 0.045 3.6 72.30 0.00 21.53 1.37 0.99 3.81 4 2003 255 663 7.648 7.608 0.040 4.0 74.12 0.00 19.87 1.27 1.23 3.51 5 2002 342 664 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.6 71.60 0.00 21.32 1.36 1.95 3.77 6 2003 361 556 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.6 71.92 0.00 21.42 1.36 1.51 3.79 7 2003 32 664 7.647 7.608 0.039 3.5 71.74 0.00 21.98 1.40 0.99 3.88 8 2002 141 663 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.6 71.89 0.00 21.41 1.36 1.55 3.78 9 2001 302 249 7.644 7.608 0.036 3.8 73.63 0.00 20.77 1.32 0.61 3.67 10 2003 314 628 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.5 72.14 0.00 22.10 1.41 0.44 3.91 11 2002 246 557 7.641 7.608 0.033 4.0 74.46 0.00 19.96 1.27 0.77 3.53 12 2003 254 663 7.641 7.608 0.033 4.0 74.12 0.00 19.87 1.27 1.23 3.51 13 2001 281 613 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.8 73.63 0.00 20.77 1.32 0.59 3.67 14 2001 272 353 7.640 7.608 0.032 4.0 74.10 0.00 19.86 1.27 1.26 3.51 15 2002 337 197 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.6 72.10 0.00 21.47 1.37 1.25 3.80 16 2002 325 658 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.5 71.25 0.00 21.83 1.39 1.67 3.86 17 2003 293 651 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.8 72.98 0.00 20.59 1.31 1.48 3.64 18 2002 333 657 7.638 7.608 0.030 3.5 71.16 0.00 21.80 1.39 1.80 3.85 19 2003 273 534 7.638 7.608 0.030 4.0 74.57 0.00 19.99 1.27 0.63 3.53 20 2003 259 664 7.638 7.608 0.030 4.0 74.51 0.00 19.97 1.27 0.71 3.53 21 2001 23 557 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.5 71.93 0.00 22.03 1.40 0.74 3.89 22 2002 56 197 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.2 69.60 0.00 23.32 1.49 1.47 4.12 23 2002 140 651 7.635 7.608 0.027 3.6 72.25 0.00 21.52 1.37 1.05 3.80 24 2002 344 658 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.6 71.92 0.00 21.42 1.36 1.51 3.79 25

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 272 0 693 7.633 7.58 0.053 4 73.5 0 19.7 1.25 2.05 3.48 1 2002 1 0 694 7.622 7.58 0.042 3.5 71.32 0 21.85 1.3 9 1.58 3.86 2 2001 45 0 666 7.622 7.58 0.042 3.1 68.8 0 23.79 1.5 2 1.69 4.21 3 2001 11 0 693 7.615 7.58 0.035 3.4 70.17 0 22.13 1. 41 2.38 3.91 4 2001 260 0 688 7.614 7.58 0.034 4 73.93 0 19.82 1.2 6 1.49 3.5 5 2001 365 0 688 7.613 7.58 0.033 3.5 71.38 0 21.86 1 .39 1.49 3.86 6 2001 291 0 688 7.612 7.58 0.032 3.7 72.58 0 21.03 1 .34 1.33 3.72 7 2001 55 0 694 7.607 7.58 0.027 3.1 68.78 0 23.79 1. 52 1.72 4.2 8 2001 356 0 693 7.606 7.58 0.026 3.5 70.77 0 21.68 1 .38 2.34 3.83 9 2001 3 0 693 7.606 7.58 0.026 3.4 70.51 0 22.23 1.4 2 1.91 3.93 10 2001 44 0 694 7.605 7.58 0.025 3.1 68.65 0 23.74 1. 51 1.9 4.2 11 2001 36 0 694 7.605 7.58 0.025 3.1 68.8 0 23.79 1.5 2 1.68 4.21 12 2001 261 0 682 7.604 7.58 0.024 4 73.69 0 19.75 1.2 6 1.8 3.49 13 2001 275 0 688 7.603 7.58 0.023 3.7 72.03 0 20.87 1 .33 2.08 3.69 14 2001 68 0 666 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.1 68.07 0 23.54 1.5 2 .72 4.16 15 2001 24 0 691 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.4 70.46 0 22.22 1.42 1.98 3.93 16 2001 228 0 694 7.598 7.58 0.018 4.1 73.97 0 19.34 1 .23 2.03 3.42 17 2001 270 0 693 7.597 7.58 0.017 4 73.53 0 19.71 1.2 6 2.02 3.48 18 2001 172 0 688 7.597 7.58 0.017 3.7 72.42 0 20.98 1 .34 1.55 3.71 19 2001 117 0 688 7.597 7.58 0.017 3 68.27 0 24.4 1.55 1.45 4.31 20

2002 308 0 688 7.676 7.58 0.096 3.5 70.68 0 21.65 1 .38 2.46 3.83 1 2002 307 0 694 7.633 7.58 0.053 3.5 70.86 0 21.71 1 .38 2.21 3.84 2 2002 126 0 688 7.621 7.58 0.041 3.3 70.24 0 22.82 1 .45 1.45 4.03 3 2002 155 0 688 7.615 7.58 0.035 3.7 71.85 0 20.82 1 .33 2.33 3.68 4 2002 331 0 688 7.613 7.58 0.033 3.5 71.28 0 21.83 1 .39 1.64 3.86 5 2002 312 0 688 7.613 7.58 0.033 3.5 71.19 0 21.81 1 .39 1.76 3.85 6 2002 2 0 694 7.612 7.58 0.032 3.4 71.07 0 22.41 1.4 3 1.13 3.96 7 2002 261 0 694 7.606 7.58 0.026 4 73.37 0 19.66 1.2 5 2.24 3.48 8 2002 324 0 693 7.605 7.58 0.025 3.5 70.94 0 21.73 1 .38 2.11 3.84 9 2002 54 0 694 7.604 7.58 0.024 3.1 68.43 0 23.67 1. 51 2.21 4.18 10 2002 352 0 672 7.603 7.58 0.023 3.5 71.05 0 21.76 1 .39 1.96 3.85 11 2002 305 0 688 7.603 7.58 0.023 3.7 72.53 0 21.02 1 .34 1.4 3.71 12 2002 29 0 694 7.603 7.58 0.023 3.4 71.02 0 22.4 1.4 3 1.19 3.96 13 2002 362 0 693 7.602 7.58 0.022 3.5 70.7 0 21.66 1. 38 2.43 3.83 14 2002 17 0 694 7.601 7.58 0.021 3.4 70.26 0 22.16 1. 41 2.24 3.92 15 2002 337 0 682 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.5 71.11 0 21.78 1.39 1.87 3.85 16 2002 300 0 688 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.7 72.31 0 20.95 1.33 1.69 3.7 17 2002 82 0 691 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.1 68.59 0 23.72 1.51 1.98 4.19 18 2002 301 0 694 7.599 7.58 0.019 3.7 71.72 0 20.78 1 .32 2.5 3.67 19 2002 13 0 682 7.599 7.58 0.019 3.4 69.99 0 22.07 1. 41 2.63 3.9 20

2003 252 0 693 7.663 7.58 0.083 4 73.51 0 19.7 1.26 2.04 3.48 1 2003 83 0 694 7.619 7.58 0.039 3.1 68.12 0 23.56 1. 5 2.66 4.16 2 2003 335 0 688 7.617 7.58 0.037 3.5 70.78 0 21.68 1 .38 2.33 3.83 3 2003 292 0 688 7.612 7.58 0.032 3.7 72.07 0 20.88 1 .33 2.02 3.69 4 2003 279 0 693 7.61 7.58 0.03 3.7 72.13 0 20.9 1.33 1.94 3.69 5 2003 256 0 694 7.608 7.58 0.028 4 74.08 0 19.86 1.2 6 1.28 3.51 6 2003 356 0 688 7.607 7.58 0.027 3.5 70.72 0 21.66 1 .38 2.4 3.83 7 2003 347 0 688 7.607 7.58 0.027 3.5 71.02 0 21.75 1 .39 1.99 3.85 8 2003 251 0 693 7.607 7.58 0.027 4 73.86 0 19.8 1.26 1.58 3.5 9 2003 343 0 693 7.604 7.58 0.024 3.5 70.72 0 21.66 1 .38 2.4 3.83 10 2003 14 0 694 7.603 7.58 0.023 3.4 70.64 0 22.28 1. 42 1.73 3.94 11 2003 28 0 671 7.601 7.58 0.021 3.4 70.49 0 22.23 1. 42 1.94 3.93 12 2003 284 0 688 7.599 7.58 0.019 3.7 72.91 0 21.13 1 .35 0.88 3.73 13 2003 114 0 693 7.599 7.58 0.019 3 67.71 0 24.2 1.54 2.28 4.28 14 2003 262 0 693 7.597 7.58 0.017 4 73.68 0 19.75 1.2 6 1.82 3.49 15 2003 135 0 693 7.597 7.58 0.017 3.3 69.82 0 22.69 1 .44 2.04 4.01 16 2003 325 0 693 7.596 7.58 0.016 3.5 71.16 0 21.8 1. 39 1.8 3.85 17 2003 176 0 694 7.596 7.58 0.016 3.7 72.37 0 20.97 1 .34 1.62 3.71 18 2003 271 0 682 7.595 7.58 0.015 4 74.49 0 19.97 1.2 7 0.73 3.53 19 2003 76 0 693 7.594 7.58 0.014 3.1 68.88 0 23.82 1. 52 1.56 4.21 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 25 Days Over Three Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2002 308 688 7.676 7.580 0.096 3.5 70.68 0.00 21.65 1.38 2.46 3.83 1 2003 252 693 7.663 7.580 0.083 4.0 73.51 0.00 19.70 1.26 2.04 3.48 2 2001 272 693 7.633 7.580 0.053 4.0 73.50 0.00 19.70 1.25 2.05 3.48 3 2002 307 694 7.633 7.580 0.053 3.5 70.86 0.00 21.71 1.38 2.21 3.84 4 2002 1 694 7.622 7.580 0.042 3.5 71.32 0.00 21.85 1 .39 1.58 3.86 5 2001 45 666 7.622 7.580 0.042 3.1 68.80 0.00 23.79 1.52 1.69 4.21 6 2002 126 688 7.621 7.580 0.041 3.3 70.24 0.00 22.82 1.45 1.45 4.03 7 2003 83 694 7.619 7.580 0.039 3.1 68.12 0.00 23.56 1.50 2.66 4.16 8 2003 335 688 7.617 7.580 0.037 3.5 70.78 0.00 21.68 1.38 2.33 3.83 9 2001 11 693 7.615 7.580 0.035 3.4 70.17 0.00 22.13 1.41 2.38 3.91 10 2002 155 688 7.615 7.580 0.035 3.7 71.85 0.00 20.82 1.33 2.33 3.68 11 2001 260 688 7.614 7.580 0.034 4.0 73.93 0.00 19.82 1.26 1.49 3.50 12 2001 365 688 7.613 7.580 0.033 3.5 71.38 0.00 21.86 1.39 1.49 3.86 13 2002 331 688 7.613 7.580 0.033 3.5 71.28 0.00 21.83 1.39 1.64 3.86 14 2002 312 688 7.613 7.580 0.033 3.5 71.19 0.00 21.81 1.39 1.76 3.85 15 2001 291 688 7.612 7.580 0.032 3.7 72.58 0.00 21.03 1.34 1.33 3.72 16 2002 2 694 7.612 7.580 0.032 3.4 71.07 0.00 22.41 1 .43 1.13 3.96 17 2003 292 688 7.612 7.580 0.032 3.7 72.07 0.00 20.88 1.33 2.02 3.69 18 2003 279 693 7.610 7.580 0.030 3.7 72.13 0.00 20.90 1.33 1.94 3.69 19 2003 256 694 7.608 7.580 0.028 4.0 74.08 0.00 19.86 1.26 1.28 3.51 20 2001 55 694 7.607 7.580 0.027 3.1 68.78 0.00 23.79 1.52 1.72 4.20 21 2003 356 688 7.607 7.580 0.027 3.5 70.72 0.00 21.66 1.38 2.40 3.83 22 2003 347 688 7.607 7.580 0.027 3.5 71.02 0.00 21.75 1.39 1.99 3.85 23 2003 251 693 7.607 7.580 0.027 4.0 73.86 0.00 19.80 1.26 1.58 3.50 24 2001 356 693 7.606 7.580 0.026 3.5 70.77 0.00 21.68 1.38 2.34 3.83 25